Rajalakshmi vs The Block Development officer Advocate - Govt. pleader — 139/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 27(c). Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB170001752022
Next Hearing
25th March 2026
Filing Number
231/2022
Filing Date
20-07-2022
Registration No
139/2022
Registration Date
20-07-2022
Court
District Munsif Court, Sulur
Judge
30-DISTRICT MUNSIF, SULUR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajalakshmi
Adv. Jayanthinathan.M
Respondent(s)
The Block Development officer Advocate - Govt. pleader
The Assistant Director
Adv. Govt. pleader
The District Collector
Adv. Govt. pleader
Hearing History
Judge: 30-DISTRICT MUNSIF, SULUR
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 10-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 06-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 05-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: This is a witness deposition record in Original Case No. 139/2022 before the District Munsif Court of Sulur. Witness Tmt. A. Santhi was solemnly affirmed on 02.03.2026 and testified that her written statement submitted to the court is true, and the signature therein is hers. The court admitted four documentary exhibits (recognition letter, Chennai municipal corporation documents, and a resolution) into evidence. Cross-examination by the plaintiff's counsel has been postponed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: This is a witness deposition record in Original Case No. 139/2022 before the District Munsif Court of Sulur. Witness Tmt. A. Santhi was solemnly affirmed on 02.03.2026 and testified that her written statement submitted to the court is true, and the signature therein is hers. The court admitted four documentary exhibits (recognition letter, Chennai municipal corporation documents, and a resolution) into evidence. Cross-examination by the plaintiff's counsel has been postponed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts